Rate Member posted 04-25-2003 09:44 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate Member posted 04-14-2003 02:19 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just want to bring this to everyone's attention. Red bull needs to be boycotted for a very unfair business practice they have been utilizing in order to dominate the energy drink market. Red Bull has a lot of money, and they can use their money to start unecessary lawsuits against club owners of every size who won't carry red bull. Their lawsuits claim that a given place of business uses red bull's name to sell drinks, due to their brand name dominance, but they actually sell a cheaper energy drink without informing the consumer. They deliver their papers over and over, taking club owners to court, and eventually the cost of legal fees outwieghts the right of the club owner to keep a product out of their place of business. They force clubs into buying Red Bull. Until they stop these practices people really need to help and boycott Red Bull and give other companys a fair chance in the energy drink market. Please respond and send emails to the address posted to this account and I can add more detail with any questions you have........and please pass the word!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4 | Registered: Apr 2003 | Logged: 141.155.21.202 |

Rate Member posted 04-15-2003 12:30 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What you have failed to recognize as much as you dislike Red Bull they have made themselves into a call drink. In other words, when you go to the bar and order a Red Bull-Vodka you are ordering an energy drink with vodka. Now then, if you go to the bar and order a rum and coke then you get whatever rum is the house rum and typically coke which is in the gun for the soda.

Like it or not, Red Bull has been EXTREMELY successful in this practice and their point of contention is, if a consumer asks for a Red Bull-Vodka they mean a Red Bull with vodka not KMX-vodka, Rock Star vodka,etc...

Rate Member posted 04-15-2003 02:06 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above has a point, but in my experience these lawsuits are not based on what they ask for at the bar, rather whether the bar carries red bull or not. My bartenders and waitress actually waste their time now in a loud club to explain to patrons that we don't have redbull. I have spotter look for these things, and I have not gotten a negative report. They make phony claims of purchases made in clubs to build a case and then they file papers and file papers and file papers until the club owner gives up and makes red bull part of their inventory to avoid a costly ensuing legal battle. No one has the money or time right now to make a Supreme Court Case sighting the likes of Coke, Kleenex, Xerox, and Q-tips. Red Bull knows this and they are vicious to companies who don't have the capital to defend themselves.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4 | Registered: Apr 2003 | Logged: 141.155.21.202 |

fusion
Senior Member
Member # 1107

Member Rated:
posted 04-15-2003 07:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That sounds pretty insane to me. How can a company force you to carry their product? Any real judge would throw that case out in a heartbeat. I'd say you could probably even countersue RB if they were falsely claiming that your estabishment misrepresented their energy drink as Red Bull.

Wouldn't it be easier to just eliminate all energy drink based mixed drinks from your establishment, so nobody could confuse your KMX, A-Rush, etc with Red Bull?

I am no law expert, but I do believe that precedent has a lot to do with how a case is viewed in court by the judge who is presiding over the case. It wouldn't be that hard to photocopy some court documents of cases similar to this one.

I think you're just a club/bar owner with a beef towards RB, and you're going overboard by posting here and urging everyone to boycott.

Member Rated:
posted 04-17-2003 12:32 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Red Bull deserves recognition for some of the things they have done, built a brand, created and image, ect. But to me that isnt enough to justify some of the things i h hear about them as a copany. I feel that their product is worthless so i dont drink it but i suppose thats all we can do. Not feed the bull with our money.

--------------------
Visit: http://www.savesurge.org
to Help Bring SURGE back!!
******"From The Makers of Pepsi"
Its not a gimic, its a warning label"******
***********Drink SURGE*********
***********Drikk URGE***********

Rate Member posted 04-24-2003 11:31 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Bar manager, but not an owner. Actually I feel for the owners, because they don't have the capital (especially in our economy) to fend for themselves. It's true that a judge probably would throw their case out, but the club will need proper representation. That costs money, and Red Bull can hold up the court process for a long time before a judge even warrants the case as having merit. A judge needs to her the case and a defense to that even before they decide if it will go to trial. It's a long process that can cost a lot of money being tangled up in. Red Bull has the money to use to ensure their brand dominance. Don't get me wrong, Red bull has done amazing things and has alone created a market that didn't even exist before them. But like many pioneering companies they use unfair business practices to keep out the competition. Most companies will just take red bull into their inventory so than can breathe easier knowing they don't have a gorilla of a law suit lingering behind them. Just think about how big companies will settle a lawsuit with a payoutr before it even gets to court. They do it becuase they know it will cost less to just pay the plantiff off than to win in court and have payed all the legal fees. A bar or club owner's payoff is just to start selling red bull.

RunWithDaLilGuy

05-01-2003, 12:31 PM

Can we get rid of this guy? He truly sucks at life.

<06210311>

05-23-2003, 04:57 AM

On top of that, they make a false claim about their product. Red Bull DOES NOT give you wings! :mad:

<deemerofsin>

05-23-2003, 02:19 PM

Wings are for fairies !!!! Now tell me this who wants to be a fairy? ;)

jbreen

08-01-2003, 01:26 PM

So does that mean if you go to a resturant and order a Coke and get a Pepsi instead(since they dont have coke), that Coke can sue the resturant for false representive? that is BS if that is the case.

Coco Rico

08-01-2003, 03:51 PM

Yes they can. Coke set the precedence because they were protecting their brand from cheaper knock-offs being passed off as their product.

Red Bull is apparently doing the same thing.

XS Energy

08-26-2003, 12:25 PM

NO SUGAR.
NO CARBS.
NO BULL!

XS ENERGY DRINK

<RB1>

08-26-2003, 07:04 PM

No Brains
No Idea
No Money
Tool

fusion

08-26-2003, 09:18 PM

Boo on the Quixtar IBOs..

Lisa G

09-28-2003, 10:35 PM

Red Bull is being passed off in bars all throughout the country. The law suit is not based upon carring the beverage. When someone requests a Red Bull drink and is given something else, that is not a fair business practice. If you ask for Stoli as a vodka and are given something of less value would you be upset? Think of it that way. Red bull is consumer based, they aim to please and keep its loyal customers, those are the people that order it when they are out. If you dont like it, dont drink it, the company will not be affected.

<Who Needs Red Bull?>

09-29-2003, 07:42 AM

Instead of Red Bull and vodka, one can have Zygo Energy Vodka.

70 Proof Vodka from American potatoes

All natural peach mandarin orange flavor

Taurine, D-ribose, guarana and yerba mate

Tastes better and these guys are small so no lawyers attacking club owners.